Digital BW, The Print

For Sam McCandless:

> I've forgotten whether Stan Shire is working with a Mac or a Windows
> platform and am also curious to know whether how users feel about IP5
> depends on which platform they use.

I am using IP5 on the Mac under OSX. I had some problems with the 
original OSX versions that were issued in Nov/Dec but the current 
version but the current version seems to be rock stable. FYI, below is 
a quote of a message I posted on the EpsonWideFormat  and ImagePrint 
lists:

QUOTE:
Subject:  Further Adventures with 7600 and ImagePrint

1. After downloading the current OSX version of ImagePrint 5, I now 
have stopped using the Epson driver which currently runs only under 
System 9. And I have come to the conclusion that the IP5 color profiles 
are slightly more accurate than Atkinson's. While I had some 
difficulties with the previous OSX versions, related to the hardware 
protection key, the current OSX version of IP5 seems to be rock stable.

2. Before printing with the 7600, I used the 1290 whose (Epson) paper 
profiles were nowhere nearly as accurate as the IP5 and Atkinson 
profiles for the 7600 and, since the profiles were not that accurate, I 
did not use any "printer targeting adjustment adjustment layers" as 
described in Real World Photoshop 7 (pages 371-378). It's ironic: 
because the 1290 Epson profiles were not that accurate, the prints were 
closer to the standard monitor image rather than to the Photoshop 
"proofing image" viewed through the paper profile. Now, with both the 
IP5 and Atkinson profiles, I save the final color corrected file iand 
thern proceed to make "printer targeting adjustment layers as described 
in Real World Photoshop 7: I make a copy of the image and view it 
side-by-side on the monitor with the original image to which I apply 
the Proof Colors facility; then, I apply a curve adjustment layer and a 
hue/saturation layer for printer targeting until the original (proof) 
image looks as close as possible like the copy image. I have found 
that, for most photos, I can use the same set of adjustment layers, 
which I have saved as a PS file so that I can just drag the printe 
rtargeting  adjustment layers onto the image that I am going to proof 
and print.

3. So far, I have been printing with Photo Black on Epson Premium 
Semi-Matte paper, and this is a satisfactory solution for color prints, 
but the one B&W print I made did not look on this paper. Incidentally, 
the IP5 B&W profile was spot-on neutral. Before deciding to switch to 
Matte Black ink and matte paper I'll have to make a few more B&W print 
tests. But the question of glossy-type versus matte paper for the 
ultrachrome ink inks does not have an obvious answer. On the Digital 
B&W Forum, Julian Thomas has stated that an Ilford semi-gloss paper, 
similar to Epson Semi-Matte has better blacks than matte paper. I have 
one color photo with a lot of blacks on it which has been printer with 
PK ink on Semi-Matte and with MK on EEM and it's a hard call which has 
better blacks: it seems to depend on how the light strikes the picture 
-- under some viewing angles the blacks look better on the matte paper 
while at other angles the Semi-Matte (really semi-gloss in appearance) 
look better.  I also agree with Julian Thomas that once the prints are 
framed under glass, there may be little difference in the appearance of 
matte and semi-gloss paper. While I prefer the tactile "feel" of matte 
paper, I am more concerned how the print looks once its framed under 
glass. So, far me for color prints, matte versus semig-gloss is a 
toss-up. I'll have to see what conclusion I'll come to for B&W, which 
is what will drive the decision of whether to change to MK and matte 
paper.
END QOUTE

--Mitch/Bangkok